Website design

Some time ago, I did a bunch of work that gave all the pages on the LPSF website a consistent look and feel. I've noticed that it seems to have become a hog-podge more and more and has reverted to the 1970s style logo. Is there any interest in making it look a bit more professional? I realize that aesthetics are subjective and I don't mean to put down the work that has been done to keep things running, but for comparison, see:

http://www.sfgreenparty.org/

-- Steve

i agree the libertarian party as a whole could stand to learn from the green party here.

jay

Hi Steve,

You ask whether there is interest in changing the look of our LPSF
website. Well, I happen to like the look of our website (as you say
aesthetics is subjective!), but I think our webmaster would welcome
suggestions. Also, what I believe could improve (obviously due to
the fact that our webmaster has been tirelessly laboring on this site
for years practically single handedly) is the updating. If there
were more people assisting our webmaster, would that help put more,
new content? Lastly, our webmaster has been working on making the
site readable to people like me who have old, decrepid monitors (640
x 480); I bet he could use some help there too.

Regards,

Marcy

Some time ago, I did a bunch of work that gave all the pages on the
LPSF website a consistent look and feel. I've noticed that it seems

to

have become a hog-podge more and more and has reverted to the 1970s
style logo. Is there any interest in making it look a bit more
professional? I realize that aesthetics are subjective and I don't

mean

to put down the work that has been done to keep things running, but

for

Steve - I'm with you on this. I think our site has
become very 'retro'. On the other hand, there are some
snazzy LP sites out there as well, so it's not just
the greens that are cool.

check out -

austin - http://www.austinliberty.org/

chicago - http://www.lpchicago.org/

By the way, you probably know that website design
rates are still pretty low. I outsourced a corp.
brochure-ware site to a company in Indian. They put
together a webite that was even more advanced than the
SFgreens for about $400. It even had some Flash on
it...

David

--- Steve Dekorte <steve@...> wrote:

I don't know about the rest of you, but that Green Party website took
forever to load in my browser (and no, I do not use IE). In contrast,
the current lpsf website loads almost instantly. I personally prefer
sites that are clean and well organized and easy to navigate, as opposed
to cumbersome flash animations and incredibly high resolution graphics
that may look very pretty, but consume too many computing resources.

Just to confirm my observations, I just a moment ago reloaded the green
party site, and once again, it took more than 45 seconds to finish
loading (and I've got a broadband connection). I can't imagine how
people with dial-up access ever get to that page. If I were still using
dial-up, I would never have the patience to wait that long to get into
their site.

While traveling in Texas last week, I had to use my stepbrother's
computer to get online, and he has a dial-up connection. Even at
56Kbps, it took 3 and a half minutes to load the main MSN Homepage, so I
have a great deal of sympathy for this significant segment of the online
community. Perhaps the SF Bay Area is a unique environment due to our
proximity to Silicon Valley, but in the rest of the country, broadband
internet access is only available to about 54% of computer users. The
rest of the world connects at 56K and with that limited bandwidth, the
Green Party website would take at least half an hour to load.

Terry Floyd

Terry, I didn't mean to suggest we should copy everything about that site. I actually think the Green site is much too busy (just as I believe the LPSF site is). But it does look professional and modern.

-- Steve

Hi everyone,

I was a guest at the last meeting, and I've just joined the LP.

I'm also a programmer working mostly on Web software, so I've got some
opinions here. Overall, I think lpsf.org is better designed than
sfgreenparty.org. It is more spartan, but that makes it much more usable
and accessible. It's kind of sad that the Greens are so out of touch with
their claimed constituency so as to build a Web site few people even have
the hardware to view. The only thing that strikes me as more professional
is the quality of the images. The current logo on lpsf.org is too grainy,
not very crisp and clean. (It also takes up too much space on the page.)

There is a little clutter and inconsistency that can be cleaned up on
lpsf.org, and it could use a bit of reorganization to make sure the
information people are looking for is easy to find. For example, the most
prominent things I see when I first open the home page are a large logo, a
picture of Michael Badnarik, a picture of an eye under the "Libertarian
TV" heading, and an animation about The Quiz. However, what I'm usually
looking for are things like confirmation of the upcoming meeting, which is
only found in tiny print far down the page on the right, and news and
announcements, which also require scrolling down the page.

Justin :slight_smile:

Hi Justin,

First, welcome to the San Francisco Libertarian Party. I hope you can
make it to the meeting today.

Thanks for your input on the LPSF Website. It would be great if you
and Steve Dekorte could get together with Bryce Bigwood our webmaster
and/or Chris Maden our Communications Chair to spruce up the
website. I totally agree with you and Terry Floyd regarding the need
for simplicity for the sake of people like me, with old computers and
even older software.

Bryce said he would try to make it to the meeting today (his job is
in crunch mode right now). Could you and Steve say a few words at
the meeting today about what could be done to help Bryce with the
updating of the Website?

Regards,

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Justin Sampson <justin@k...>
wrote:

Hi everyone,

I was a guest at the last meeting, and I've just joined the LP.

I'm also a programmer working mostly on Web software, so I've got

some

opinions here. Overall, I think lpsf.org is better designed than
sfgreenparty.org. It is more spartan, but that makes it much more

usable

and accessible. It's kind of sad that the Greens are so out of

touch with

their claimed constituency so as to build a Web site few people

even have

the hardware to view. The only thing that strikes me as more

professional

is the quality of the images. The current logo on lpsf.org is too

grainy,

not very crisp and clean. (It also takes up too much space on the

page.)

There is a little clutter and inconsistency that can be cleaned up

on

lpsf.org, and it could use a bit of reorganization to make sure the
information people are looking for is easy to find. For example,

the most

prominent things I see when I first open the home page are a large

logo, a

picture of Michael Badnarik, a picture of an eye under

the "Libertarian

TV" heading, and an animation about The Quiz. However, what I'm

usually

looking for are things like confirmation of the upcoming meeting,

which is

only found in tiny print far down the page on the right, and news

and

announcements, which also require scrolling down the page.

Justin :slight_smile:

> I don't know about the rest of you, but that Green Party website

took

> forever to load in my browser (and no, I do not use IE). In

contrast,

> the current lpsf website loads almost instantly. I personally

prefer

> sites that are clean and well organized and easy to navigate, as

opposed

> to cumbersome flash animations and incredibly high resolution

graphics

> that may look very pretty, but consume too many computing

resources.

>
> Just to confirm my observations, I just a moment ago reloaded the

green

> party site, and once again, it took more than 45 seconds to finish
> loading (and I've got a broadband connection). I can't imagine

how

> people with dial-up access ever get to that page. If I were

still using

> dial-up, I would never have the patience to wait that long to get

into

> their site.
>
> While traveling in Texas last week, I had to use my stepbrother's
> computer to get online, and he has a dial-up connection. Even at
> 56Kbps, it took 3 and a half minutes to load the main MSN

Homepage, so I

> have a great deal of sympathy for this significant segment of the

online

> community. Perhaps the SF Bay Area is a unique environment due

to our

> proximity to Silicon Valley, but in the rest of the country,

broadband

> internet access is only available to about 54% of computer

users. The

> rest of the world connects at 56K and with that limited

bandwidth, the

> Green Party website would take at least half an hour to load.
>
> Terry Floyd
>
>
> From: Steve Dekorte [mailto:steve@d…]
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 4:11 PM
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Website design
>
> Some time ago, I did a bunch of work that gave all the pages on

the LPSF

> website a consistent look and feel. I've noticed that it seems to

have

> become a hog-podge more and more and has reverted to the 1970s

style

> logo. Is there any interest in making it look a bit more

professional? I

> realize that aesthetics are subjective and I don't mean to put

down the

> work that has been done to keep things running, but for

comparison, see: